Underground Infrastructure - February 2023 - 8

EDITOR'SLOG
Stampede
Robert Carpenter | Editor-in-Chief
Have you rushed out and purchased your
outerspace-esque designed, super sleek,
high-priced electric car/SUV that's going
to save the environment?
If you've seen the plethora of new car ads
these days, it makes one wonder why we're
not all jumping on the electric vehicle (EV)
bandwagon, joining the mad stampede
being whipped up for misguided, single-minded and heavily biased
political motives. The effort is geared to make the American
public enthusiastically ditch carbon cars and shell out thousands
of extra dollars for an electric car or SUV. Even a major pizza
delivery chain has been swept up in the movement, apparently
believing that electric car pizza delivery equals better pizza sales.
The President Biden Administration's narrative has been to
mercilessly shun, blame and attack " big-oil " companies, gas companies
and any pipeline ever built as the root of environmental
evil. The President has used his bully pulpit to supplement his
unending rules and regulations against oil and gas, as the way to
achieve the " carbon-free " goal of his zealous backers.
Shockingly, I'm in favor of EVs. But all in good time. I am
dead-set against this rush to abandon our carbon energy programs
without adequate solutions in place. This destroy-oil-andgas
scenario is taking us down a disastrous path that is dangerous,
ill-conceived and, in the long-run, not practical. And to an
open mind, it is also unnecessary.
Several years ago, some of us were defining natural gas as a
bridge or transition fuel - an economical, plentiful source that
generated up to 80-percent less emissions than other carbon
fuels. Research showed that if just heavy trucks converted to
compressed natural gas from diesel (a relatively cheap and easy
conversion, as the technology was already available), within just
a few short months, air pollution as we know it would cease to
exist. The infrastructure for CNG refilling stations in the U.S.
was already growing. What an awesome, effective and elegant
solution to an immediate problem.
Sadly, under the Obama/Biden administration, support for
progress in this direction quietly and quickly diminished. It was
still considered a carbon-based solution that was unacceptable.
For our current " electric generation, " batteries are key to
current EV car designs, yet still provide extreme challenges for
manufacturers. Providing enough power for travel is often not
possible. Further, range for electric cars costs a lot of money.
An often-used example is that the Nissan Leaf with 226 miles
of range costs $6,600 more than the same trim level with a
149-mile range.
EVs utilize a technology called regenerative charging, where
breaking in the stop-and-go traffic of cities supplements the
8 FEBRUARY 2023 | UndergroundInfrastructure.com
battery charge. However, that's not applicable on longer distances
of travel. If a car has a milage range of 300 miles, you
will probably only get half that when it's not necessary to brake
frequently or you're driving on open highways. That explains
why 90 percent of people with an EV also own a conventional
gasoline engine car. So much for the Progressives dreams of everyone
driving only electric cars.
Also, the more range of an EV, the heavier the batteries become.
Even low-range battery packs add roughly 800 pounds
to the overall weight of a car; extended-range EVs can be
2,000 pounds heavier. Compare that to a gas car, with an average
added weight in gasoline of 100 pounds that decreases
as consumed. EVs' weight is constant and maintains a steady
drain on batteries.
With that extra weight, additional risks to highway safety,
unfortunately, but predictably, emerge. Researchers from the
University of California, Berkeley found that impacts from a
vehicle that is 1,000 pounds heavier (due to electric battery
packs) generate a 40- to 50-percent higher fatality risk. Further,
the researchers suggested that factor generated a societal cost
equivalent to 97-cents-per-gallon gas tax.
When these battery packs have to be replaced, there are limited
options. Ultimately, they will either have to be discarded or
recycled. Discarded batteries have already proven too dangerous
for landfills. Cost-effective and practical methods of recycling
these massive batteries don't exist yet - the only workable
recycling process is extremely expensive and impractical. Several
major companies, including Argonne National Labs and former
Tesla Co-Founder JB Straubel, are trying to solve this elusive
problem. Straubel, most notably, has partnered with Ford.
It's also important to note that not all EV batteries can be
recycled. Virtually all experts and scientists agree that improper
disposal of electric car batteries will have a major adverse effect
on the world environment.
All these issues, and more, present clear evidence that any
stampede to EVs should be blunted and allow reason to flourish.
An EV future could be a good thing. Alternative batteries
are in the conception stage that would supply better power
with fewer environmental risks. But such science needs time.
The most damning obstacle for EVs is the hypocrisy of the
entire movement to an electric-only environment, whether it
be cars, cooking stoves, heaters, etc. All are reliant on other
fuel sources and the most cost-effective, proven, established
and plentiful one remains natural gas. If given the opportunity,
gas is our low-carbon-impact, high-efficiency transition energy
source, while the world solves the ultimate environmental and
alternative fuel challenges.
Simply allowing gas to do its job will make EVs practical. UI
http://www.UndergroundInfrastructure.com
Underground Infrastructure - February 2023

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Underground Infrastructure - February 2023
